Presumption of RFC5322 compliance is the mistake made in DKIM and ADSP.
50% agreed. This mistake is only in DKIM, IMHO.
At this point, it would be helpful if you could propose specific language
for 4871bis. And if it's not presuming 5322 compliance, it would also be
helpful if you could say in detail what a DKIM signer and verifier should
do if presented with, say, a Windows executable file. Not a MIME encoded
message body containing one, just an EXE file. If you don't require 5322
compliance or something close to it, that's as legitimate a signing
candidate as anything.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html